GKT School of Medical Education, King's College London, London, UK.
King's College Hospital and Guy's and St.Thomas' Hospitals, London, UK.
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2024 Feb;48(3):530-542. doi: 10.1007/s00266-023-03553-2. Epub 2023 Aug 17.
Social media has revolutionised how plastic surgeons advertise their work and promote their services, but concerns have been raised regarding the ethics of these practices. This review aims to identify said concerns and develop measures to address them.
PubMed, Cochrane and Medline were searched for studies assessing the ethics of social media use by plastic surgeons. Five search terms were used and 23 studies identified. Results were catalogued according to which principle of medical ethics was infringed.
Autonomy: Patients must not be coerced into allowing their operative media to be shared and content anonymised by removing identifiable features and scrubbing metadata. Beneficence: It is difficult to balance the benefit to patients of posting photographs for educational purposes with the risk of identifiable features being present, particularly within craniofacial surgery. Non-maleficence: Taking operative media could be a distraction from the patient and lengthen the procedure which could lead to harm. Any content posted on social media should be adapted to avoid trivialisation or sexualisation. Justice: Surgeons should not entertain their audience to increase their following at the expense of patients.
Greater oversight of social media use by plastic surgeons is required to avoid patient harm and tarnishing of the specialty's professional standing. Professional bodies should be tasked with devising a course dedicated to the responsible use of these platforms. This should ensure the public's trust in the specialty does not become eroded and patients are not harmed by unethical social media use. This review highlights the relevant shortfalls of SoMe use by plastic surgery Several proposals are made to reduce the incidence of these shortfalls and to ensure SoMe is used in a professional and responsible manner It also lists areas of the specialty where SoMe is underused and could be of help, such as academia LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors http://www.springer.com/00266 .
社交媒体彻底改变了整形医生宣传工作和推广服务的方式，但人们对这些做法的伦理道德提出了担忧。本综述旨在确定这些担忧，并提出解决这些担忧的措施。
在 PubMed、Cochrane 和 Medline 上搜索评估整形医生使用社交媒体的伦理问题的研究。使用了 5 个搜索词，确定了 23 项研究。根据侵犯了哪项医学伦理原则对结果进行分类。
自主性：患者不应被迫允许分享他们的手术媒体，并通过去除可识别的特征和清理元数据来匿名化内容。有利原则：很难平衡为教育目的发布照片对患者的好处与存在可识别特征的风险之间的平衡，特别是在颅面外科中。不伤害原则：拍摄手术媒体可能会分散患者的注意力，并延长手术时间，从而导致伤害。在社交媒体上发布的任何内容都应进行调整，以避免琐碎化或色情化。正义原则：外科医生不应为了增加粉丝数量而牺牲患者的利益来取悦观众。
需要加强对整形医生使用社交媒体的监管，以避免患者受到伤害和损害该专业的专业地位。专业机构应负责制定一门专门针对这些平台负责任使用的课程。这应确保公众对该专业的信任不会受到侵蚀，并且患者不会因不道德的社交媒体使用而受到伤害。本综述强调了社交媒体在整形手术中的相关不足之处。提出了一些建议，以减少这些不足之处的发生，并确保社交媒体以专业和负责任的方式使用。它还列出了社交媒体在整形手术中未得到充分利用但可能有所帮助的领域，例如学术界。
证据水平 IV：本期刊要求作者为每篇文章指定一个证据级别。有关这些循证医学评级的完整描述，请参阅目录或在线作者指南 http://www.springer.com/00266 。
